Just read Mike Law's editorial in the latest Rock magazine. He thinks we should be using the French grading system in Australia for sports climbing and the Ewbank system from Trad. I think it's a great idea. I've only been climbing for two years (sport/trad) and whilst I have ticked a couple of 24 (7a) sport climbs, to tackle a 20 trad is another world for me.

I know "we've always done things this way, why change it?" is a pretty poor argument for the status quo* but to me it does seem to apply here.

Have not read Mike Law's article, maybe it has some compelling reasons for change embedded in it. But why so hung up on grades and grading systems anyway?

I'm perfectly happy with the concept of my being capable (or willing) to climb a few grades harder when clipping bolts** than when trying to wiggle in wires***, whether that be in the Ewbank system or the YD system or whatever.

I'm a bit of a Euro troglodyte and am not all that familiar with the French system, but unless it contains more info than is present in the Ewbank system (and it would not seem to?) I really can't see all that much reason to use it over the Ewbank.

When we've already had a thread running over the past few weeks lamenting the lack of crossover between sport and trad (especially in that direction), why widen the gulf?

*Except in the case of usage of US customary units of measurements; we don't want to confuse our American friends any more than we have to, they get angry.
**As long as they're really closely spaced bolts and I have a vocal audience urging me on, that is.
***And apparently capable of climbing a few grades harder in the Grampians than at Buffalo or at Yosemite than at Joshua Tree...

Its hard for me to form an opinion on the Ewbank vs french, I seem to climb the same trad grades as sport I always find the technical difficulty on rock is a constant and the main variable that exists between sport and trad is the protection and or more adventurous climbs, objective danger. Trad grades should probably represent technical and overall danger level.

maybe trad should be something like UK system.?.Sport could be French and everything else that nobody can be bothered to regrade in the endless list of guidebooks and web media should stay.Ewbank.

On 10/02/2013 southcol wrote:>I always find the technical difficulty on rock is a constant and the main variable that exists between sport and trad is the protection and or more adventurous climbs, objective danger. Trad grades should probably represent technical and overall danger level.

Regarding the French system and every other grading system (apart from Australia)... why do they all incorporate numbers, letters as well + and - ?

I can't see any logic to such nonsense and I see no reason to adopt it.

Another hiccup with adopting the French system in the manner that Mikl has suggested is how does that work at Arapiles where harder trad routes are frequently climbed in a sport climbing manner on pre-placed gear? If you onsight Cobwebs placing gear, do you say that you have climbed 28, but if you work it on top-rope and then lead it on pre-placed gear do you say you have climbed 7C+. What about if you work it and know all the gear and then lead it placing gear as you go? At the end of the day both grades mean the same thing in the grading comparison chart anyway.

No grading system is perfect and when you throw grading discrepancies between different areas into the mix it becomes even messier.

BTW if you want to get a realistic idea of grading anywhere in the world, then go to the more traditional areas and use that as your yardstick. The more recently developed pussy sport cliffs around the world seem to be graded for some sort of feelgood factor aimed at making areas more popular.

But if some guidebook writer wants to start using the French grading system somewhere in Australia, then no one is going to stop them.

How you Aussies say, I one more time-a unclog my nose in your direction, sons of a window-dresser!
So, you think you could out-clever us French folk with your silly grading behavior! I wave my private parts at your aunties, you heaving lot of second-hand electric donkey bottom biters.

On 11/02/2013 simey wrote:>Regarding the French system and every other grading system (apart from>Australia)... why do they all incorporate numbers, letters as well + and>- ?

[haven't read article, scouring net to find it...]

I reckon the pommies have sorta got it right - in that, most Blue Mountains climbs are UNCLIMBABLE with trad gear - there's simply nowhere you could stick anything in blank faces with mini crimps; so that would essentially be EXTREMELY SEVERELY IMPOSSIBLY RUNOUT in Uk grades, even if the climb is only a 5a...

I always thought it would be better if the + & - reflected the quality of the climb;

eg. 21- = hard, but don't bother... kinda like an inbuilt star system. First ascentionist could indicate their level of pride in the route description!

eg. Waste of time 12m, 21- Spent a week working on what i thought would be an amazing arete, only to discover the crux was the only decent move on the rest of this chossy block. Don't bother.

My thoughts are that you're a softc--k and you know it. In some way you might hope that if the grading systems were separated you'd feel less bad about the situation, but deep down you must realise how superficial a remedy that would be.

On 10/02/2013 southcol wrote:>Its hard for me to form an opinion on the Ewbank vs french, I seem to>climb the same trad grades as sport I always find the technical difficulty>on rock is a constant and the main variable that exists between sport and>trad is the protection and or more adventurous climbs, objective danger.> Trad grades should probably represent technical and overall danger level.

+1 to the above.
Except to add something by revisiting Wendy's comment at one stage, that trad is sometimes less scary 'cos you can place gear where you like, and 'lace it up' if you're feeling scared.
Well-spaced bolts on a 'sport route' are more intimidating than a trad crack.

>Another hiccup with adopting the French system in the manner that Mikl>has suggested is how does that work at Arapiles where harder trad routes>are frequently climbed in a sport climbing manner on pre-placed gear?

I'm all for it, one inconvenience IMO isnt enough not to justify it! Nothing would change as the way it is now. "i climbed that 7c+(8a!!) cobwebs onsight placing gear, or i climbed that 7c+, cobwebs, after 48 toprope burns on preplace gear with really long slings." the grade and style of ascent are too very different things, tho one does reflect more difficulty!

your still going to have all the same debates about soft/hard routes etc, all that will change is a number to another number, with all the other rabble still there!

How do i grade mixed routes? The Totem pole for example is a sport route IMO, 7b is fair!

I think it makes more sense to sack off our dumb M grading system for aid! as M = mixed climbing EVERYwhere else in the world. Yes there is mixed climbing in Australia, about as much as there is aid-climbing!!

>>I'm all for it, one inconvenience IMO isnt enough not to justify it!

'I'm all for...." --> common vernacular meaning I am in favor of/support the notion of...

'it' --> if you could please refer the OP you would understand I am saying i, myself do, in some measure, support the original notion that French Grading could be applied to sport climbing, that is climbing predominantly protected from masonry type anchors.

'one inconvenience' --> there will always be an exception, this doesn't disprove the rule.

'IMO' --> common shorthand for In My Opinion.

'to not justify it' --> sorry for a simple word mix up, can understand how hard that must have been. I am implying that the 'one inconvenience' (described above) should not be used as the measure to discard the notion of 'it' (also described above)

When a bunch of differing opinions have been expressed, chiming in with a non specific "I agree" is as clear as mud. But mostly I was stoked about the opportunity to take a cheap shot :)

Can somebody provide a short summary of Mikl's argument? I reckon he's just run out of options for creative sandbaggery, and figures that adding another axis will provide 10 more years of comedic potential.